Allowed

Uco Bank v. Surinder Singh

DRT17 Feb 2026OA/844/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by UCO Bank under Section 19 of the RDB Act for the recovery of ₹60,19,242.27 along with interest against two defendants who mortgaged agricultural land as security for the loan, issuing a recovery certificate and directing the sale of the mortgaged property.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 60,19,242.27 with interest at 11.50% per annum; costs awarded; Recovery Certificate issued; direction for sale of mortgaged land and standing crops.

Uco Bank versus Surinder Singh — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH

¶2

BEFORE: A S NARANG, PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

OA No: 844/2022 Date of Institution: 22.04.2022 Date of Decision: 17.02.2026

¶4

UCO Bank having its branches all over India and a branch at Raipur Rasulpur, Distt. Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶5

……..Applicant

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Surinder Singh s/o Sh. Dhanna Singh, r/o Village Mokhe, Post Office Nussi, Distt. Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶8

Baljit Singh s/o Sh. Surinder Singh, r/o Village Mokhe, Post Office Nussi, Distt. Jalandhar, Punjab.

¶9

……….Defendants

¶10

Advocates

¶11

Sh. Nand Ram Purohit proxy counsel for Sh. Sanjiv Gupta, Counsel for the applicant bank.

¶12

Defendants - ex parte vide order dated 12.04.2023 .

¶13

OA for the Recovery of ₹60,19,242.27p with interest @11.50% per annum with half-yearly rests from 22.04.2022.

¶14

ORDER

¶15

UCO Bank has filed this application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for the recovery of ₹60,19,242.27p with interest against Sh. Surinder Singh and another (defendants).

¶16

Bank’s case is that on 19.09.2007, it had granted a loan of ₹44.00Lacs to defendants the form of K.C.C. Limit for agricultural purpose. The above mentioned limit was renewed from time to time and lastly on 04.03.2015, for ₹44.00Lacs. To secure the loan, Defendant No.1 had mortgaged his agricultural land (fully detailed in para No.3A of the application). The loan was chargeable to interest @11.50% per annum with half-yearly rests. Defendants had duly acknowledged their

¶17

¶18

liability towards the debt on 31.12.2016, 22.11.2019 & 23.03.2022. On 31.03.2022, a sum of ₹60,19,242.27p was due from the defendants. Despite repeated requests, defendants did not make the repayment. Hence, this application.

¶19

On 20.05.2022, summonses were sent to the defendants by registered post, which were duly served. However, defendants did not put in appearance. Vide order dated 12.04.2023, they were proceeded ex parte .

¶20

In order to prove its case, the Bank has placed on record the affidavit of Sh. Balbir Chand, Senior Manager along with the loan and security documents and marked them as Exhibit A-1 to A-31.

¶21

I have perused the evidence on the record. I am of the considered view that the Bank has proved its case that it had advanced the loan of ₹44.00Lacs and on 31.03.2022, a sum of ₹60,19,242.27p (₹54,47,348.44p in K.C.C. Limit; ₹3,31,530.83p in the K.C.C. Limit and ₹2,40,363/- in F.I.T.L.) was due.

¶22

Accordingly, the application of the bank for the recovery of ₹60,19,242.27p (Rupees Sixty Lacs Nineteen Thousand Two Hundred Forty Two and Paise Twenty Seven Only) with interest @11.50% per annum with half-yearly rests from 22.04.2022, till the date of payment is hereby allowed with costs. The liability of both the defendants would be joint and several. Bank can recover its dues by the sale of mortgaged land fully detailed in para No.3A of the application as well as from the personal movable and immovable property(ies) of the defendants.

¶23

Pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of.

¶24

Recovery Certificate be issued accordingly.

¶25

¶26

Parties are directed to appear before Recovery Officer on 27.03.2026, who is directed to distribute the sale proceeds of the mortgaged land and standing crops as per the provisions of Section 19(20-AB) of the Act . 10. A Copy of this order along with Recovery Certificate be sent to the Recovery Officer as well as the parties. Pronounced in the open Court. (A S Narang) Dated: 17.02.2026 Presiding Officer DRT-1, Chandigarh MANOJ KALRA

Uco Bank v. Surinder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uco Bank v. Surinder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus M/S Bhagwati Enterprises

Icici Bank Limited versus Ram Krishan

Hdfc Bank versus Gurlal Singh

Icici Bank Limited versus Shreyam Enterprise

Hasna Bewa versus Punjab National Bank

Bank of India versus Shri Raman Kumar Alias Raman